• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2015 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On

Status
Not open for further replies.

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I still find the "unskewed polls" debacle the most absurd political happening in years.

"Well, let's just assume that the electorate will magically revert to a much lower number of minorities like it was years ago. Instant win!"
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Yeah but now we're going to hear the "but think about the UK election" corollary when we're talking about how polls are bad.
 

HylianTom

Banned
Hey, if they want to cling to the "polls are wrong!" thing again instead of making substantive changes that might allow them to appeal to a broader swath of voters.. by all means, have at it.

For another election or two, I don't want them to admit that they have a problem.
 
Hey, if they want to cling to the "polls are wrong!" thing again instead of making substantive changes that might allow them to appeal to a broader swath of voters.. by all means, have at it.

For another election or two, I don't want them to admit that they have a problem.

Pretty much this. If they can keep it going for, say, this one, 2018, and maybe 2020, we'll be set on progressive legislation and the Supreme Court for the foreseeable future.
 
Yeah but now we're going to hear the "but think about the UK election" corollary when we're talking about how polls are bad.

On Meet the Press today one of the pundits said Hillary is now in trouble because the British election shows voters based their vote primarily on trust (no mention of incumbency, economic competency, and leadership strength) and Hillary doesn't have it because Benghazi and emails.

What kind of insane spurious extrapolation?

This election will be the worst ever.
 
On Meet the Press today one of the pundits said Hillary is now in trouble because the British election shows voters based their vote primarily on trust (no mention of incumbency, economic competency, and leadership strength) and Hillary doesn't have it because Benghazi and emails.

What kind of insane spurious extrapolation?

This election will be the worst ever.
Never mind polling is much better in US elections +demographics, party loyalty, lack of spoilers, etc etc. Let them believe that.

I'd also expect to see them reference 2014 and MD, FL, MA as proof the GOP has some silent majority
 

NeoXChaos

Member
On Meet the Press today one of the pundits said Hillary is now in trouble because the British election shows voters based their vote primarily on trust (no mention of incumbency, economic competency, and leadership strength) and Hillary doesn't have it because Benghazi and emails.

What kind of insane spurious extrapolation?

This election will be the worst ever.

Trash partisan talking points not based in reality but of a wishful fantasy world. The GOP will implode(I wish) if they lose next year. They will be so convinced of their win and Hillary is "old news" that when she does win, they will rational hard why they loss.

She is the indisputable frontrunner for the nomination and presidency right now.
 

FyreWulff

Member
On Meet the Press today one of the pundits said Hillary is now in trouble because the British election shows voters based their vote primarily on trust (no mention of incumbency, economic competency, and leadership strength) and Hillary doesn't have it because Benghazi and emails.

What kind of insane spurious extrapolation?

This election will be the worst ever.

The Republicans made Margaret Thatcher an honorary VIP in the GOP

For the party that's all about nationalism, they're also the only party that has officially added foreign heads of state as members of the party. Not too surprising considering their anglophilia, though.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Trash partisan talking points not based in reality but of a wishful fantasy world. The GOP will implode(I wish) if they lose next year. They will be so convinced of their win and Hillary is "old news" that when she does win, they will rational hard why they loss.

She is the indisputable frontrunner for the nomination and presidency right now.

And then they win hard in the midterms, and the cycle begins again.
 

Wilsongt

Member
When Obama leaves office, I wonder who the GOP is going to blame when race relationships in American don't magically improve.

Congressman Steve King today said that President Obama is to blame for the violence that broke out in Baltimore because of the culture he created.

Some of the Republican commentary on Baltimore has linked the recent unrest to the president, like when Ted Cruz claimed Obama “inflamed racial tensions.”

As King spoke of Obama driving “wedges” between all Americans at “a level that I have not seen before,” MSNBC’s Kasie Hunt asked him if, then, he blames the president for the current unrest and even violence in Baltimore. King, after some hesitation, said yes.

He argued Obama and those around him “drove that culture in Ferguson and it multiplied itself in Baltimore and across the country,” and it would serve the country better to have a president who looked the nation in the eye and said no one should discriminate, period.
 
When Obama leaves office, I wonder who the GOP is going to blame when race relationships in American don't magically improve.

C'mon, that's easy. It'll be still Obama's fault. We were almost into a race utopia, but Obama's presence was enough to cancel our gains out, permanently.
 
That's a big sell. She better not fuck with the hispanic vote just to get their support and then actually do nothing but hold firm on Obama's previous executive action.
She is a politician so of course there's always a strong chance she doesn't actually plan on doing anything, but man she has been talking up a big game lately.

Everyone keeps talking about Sanders entering to push her to the left but she kind of is already doing that.
 

ivysaur12

Banned
She is a politician so of course there's always a strong chance she doesn't actually plan on doing anything, but man she has been talking up a big game lately.

Everyone keeps talking about Sanders entering to push her to the left but she kind of is already doing that.

Because the party's been moving that way.

Also, if you want to read a charming story...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...7c67c50db0_story.html?tid=HP_more?tid=HP_more

There’s hardly a state in America that’s more hostile to Obama than South Dakota, where the president’s disapproval rating hovers around 70 percent and the local Republican Party last summer passed a resolution calling for his impeachment.

But even in an era of almost unprecedented political polarization, people still want to see their president. That was especially true in Watertown, which had never hosted a sitting commander in chief. The cargo plane landed and rolled to a stop. Inside the tiny commuter airport terminal, there were three empty couches and a television playing Fox News. Outside, a light rain was falling, and about 300 people were standing along the airport fence line. A teacher had brought her nursery school class. Farther down the metal fence line were locals who had skipped out of work for the morning and retirees balanced on wooden canes.

“This is definitely not his president,” said Laurie Brandriet Keller, gesturing to her husband. “I’m amazed how excited he’s been these last few days.”

Most in the crowd, which was now three or four people deep, were die-hard Republicans and had little love for this president. “I wonder if he’s a Christian sometimes,” said Kristi Maas, 47, who owns a small hair salon in town. Just the thought was “scary” to her, she said. “He wants to take prayer out of everything. . . . Isn’t this country supposed to be based on religion?” Heads nodded around her.

From where Maas was standing, the light was just perfect. She could see Obama smiling and waving through the tinted window for three or maybe four full seconds . . . and then he was gone.

“Oh my gosh, he waved at me!” Maas said. “That was so cool!”

Her cellphone rang with a call from her daughter.

“I just got waved at by the president!” Maas said. “Yeah, he waved at us. He didn’t roll down the window, but I could see him smiling as plain as day. He was waving at me!”

The crowd drifted slowly away. As she walked back to her car with her sister, Maas was already reconsidering her opinion of the man who minutes earlier she had believed maybe wasn’t a Christian — the man she worried was ruining the country.

“I believe in respecting our president,” her sister said.

“You only hear some of the stories about him, not all of them,” Maas agreed. “He’s a husband and a father. He has the same feelings we do.”

For the first, and probably only time in their lives, they were listening to a president talk about their town, their friends and their relatives. Stephanie Burchatz, who runs a small construction company with her dad and brother, was sipping a $2.50 Bud Light. Her eyes were trained on the president.

She had spent most of the day laying new sidewalks, curbs and gutters for the city. Now she was listening as the president talked about the girlfriend of one of her employees, a single mom who had gone back to Lake Area Tech to get an associate’s degree. “By age 20, she was working as a waitress, supporting two beautiful baby girls, Lizzie and Farah, on her own,” the president was saying.

Burchatz, 51,was nodding.

“This is good,” she was saying. “This is really, really good.”

The president was reading the speech — his seventh public address of the week — off of a teleprompter. But to the people in the bar it seemed as if he were telling their stories from memory.

When Obama was done, the bar erupted in applause. A woman sitting in the smoking room by the video poker machines had begun crying.

“Most of the time I could care less what he’s talking about,” said Jason Hollatz, 37-year-old farmer. “Are all Obama’s speeches like that?”

“I’ve got goose bumps,” Burchatz said.

Her brother glanced back at the television where Obama, his speech finished, was accepting a Lake Area Tech jacket from one of the new graduates. Suddenly his mouth fell open. “That’s the kid who ran over my mailbox last week,” he yelled.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Because the party's been moving that way.

Also, if you want to read a charming story...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...7c67c50db0_story.html?tid=HP_more?tid=HP_more

It's funny how fast they all turned around on him, that last line you quoted killed me. If this wasn't in the Post I'd assume it was a short story. In fact, this gives me an idea.

I really do think a lot of our problems understanding each other are born more of distance and isolation than anything else, both at home and abroad.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
I wonder if there exist an emerging Obama Coalition in SD and other states in that rural region. Going by that statement, it seems too entrench in that kind of conspiracy thinking to harbor Democratic Millennials who in say 10-20 years put those states in play from a political standpoint.

However Obama has that magic touch even with his staunch critics.
 
Last night a friend came to a going away party we were throwing for my bff (very intimate, like 20 people) and brought Rand Paul's communication manager with him.

Let's just say i resisted the urge to take some extremely compromising photos. I did get to grill him for a few minutes and unsurprisingly behinds the scenes the facade of cynical party politics for self preservation of power falls away and actual viewpoints are much more pragmatic. Most shocking thing was that he actually thinks they will easily beat Jeb and become the nominee.

I asked him to convince Rand to run third party if he doesn't get it to try and open up the political discussion and start our way out of the rut this two party system has created.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
you mean when you see someone in person, speaking honestly in their own words, its harder to demonize them and easier to empathize them? *imblownaway.jpg*

I wonder if there exist an emerging Obama Coalition in SD and other states in that rural region. Going by that statement, it seems too entrench in that kind of conspiracy thinking to harbor Democratic Millennials who in say 10-20 years put those states in play from a political standpoint.

However Obama has that magic touch even with his staunch critics.
Naw, the people who even remotely fit in that category inevitably migrate out of those states, or at the very least out of the super rural counties of that state.
 

Ecotic

Member
The President is always trashed and dehumanized so regularly that it's easy for the average American to forget the President is still a big deal until he's visiting your town and you see the Presidential limo, the Secret Service agents, and 50 people in the ropeline freaking out because they caught a 2 second glimpse.

I've seen my State's Governor speak a few times, and it always struck me that some poor working class parents would take their kids just to see him dedicate a new University building. It was a sort of "that could be you one day" moment. If I had young kids and even if it was a President I disliked, I'd probably still feel its my civic duty to take my kids to see the President. Just so they'd have that memory.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Apparently Ben Carson was on Fox News today and said our country needs to rethink the idea that presidents need to obey the Supreme Court's decisions.

OK.
 
VedJqF7.gif


Bucket list in full swing.
 

Jooney

Member
Apparently Ben Carson was on Fox News today and said our country needs to rethink the idea that presidents need to obey the Supreme Court's decisions.

OK.

gotta love these strict constitutionalists who are so willing to throw away once branch of government when it doesn't suit them
 

NeoXChaos

Member
This is why 2020 is super important. Need to unfuck the congressional districts. Thank God 2020 is a presidential election.

The important one starts in 2016 and continues into 2018. Most of the legislature seats and open Gov seats are up in this period of time. 2020 is the same map from 2016 respectively and will be all about protecting or increasing upon gains made and or making up for losses in the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 election time period. (I know too far ahead lol)

Lets not forget that we have races in LA, MS and KY this year. 2 open governors seats and an incumbent.

Bright red on map is term-limited Governors.



United_States_gubernatorial_elections%2C_2018.png
 

NeoXChaos

Member
This is why 2020 is super important. Need to unfuck the congressional districts. Thank God 2020 is a presidential election.

Expanding on my point. Here is what needs to go well for the Democrats.

2015: Hold KY Governors Office. Pick up legislature seats. Pick up seats in the MS and LA legislature. By some miracle they win in LA against Vitter than awesome.

2016: Hold the Presidency, Pick up the Senate and cut down seats from Republicans in the House in PVI D+0-5, R+5 and by miracle pick up R+10 districts. Hold MO, WV Governorship and pick up NC. Hold the obvious rest safe D ones.

2017: Hold VA and pick up NJ Governorship.

2018: The Big Tsunami. Hope that an incumbent Hillary dosent suffer through 2010 Obama redux. Pick up NV, NM, WI, IA, MI, FL, MA, ME, MD, IL, OH. Hold CO. If anything cut down Republican seats across the country in legislatures and hope they can salvage enough seats in the U.S House to somehow win or get close. If not, they are gonna have to hold the keys to the Governors Houses in critical swing states for redistricting. Some states like KS they may never get but they simply need to play everywhere.

2020: Hold Presidency, Hold Senate or Pick Up in case of 2018 shellacking. Wait till 2022 for restricting to take effect hoping by then their midterm problem is solved or at-least figured out.

tdr; simply a prediction and its super early. The mechanics of it all should rightfully be left up to strategist when the time comes to sort it all out. In the end, it might take years.
 
So uh, I didn't see this discussed in the last few pages:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/11/jeb-bush-i-would-have-invaded-iraq

“I would have [authorised the invasion], and so would have Hillary Clinton, just to remind everybody,” Bush told Fox News television in an interview to be aired late on Monday. “And so would almost everybody that was confronted with the intelligence they got.”

Anyone have any thoughts on this? My immediate reaction is this is wrong, but maybe I'm naive
 

Chichikov

Member
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
So uh, I didn't see this discussed in the last few pages:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/11/jeb-bush-i-would-have-invaded-iraq



Anyone have any thoughts on this? My immediate reaction is this is wrong, but maybe I'm naive

It's unfair to bring Hillary into it like that considering how she seems to clearly think her vote there was a mistake. It's fair for some people to hold that vote against her, but not if you're Jeb Bush, calling George W Bush one of your top advisors and claiming the Iraq war was never a mistake.

And the intelligence was always there to say that would be a mistake. The UN said there was no WMDs from the start and there was never a strong case for there being a strong link between Iraq and 9/11. All the intel that came out to be wrong came directly from the Bush administration.
 
So uh, I didn't see this discussed in the last few pages:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/11/jeb-bush-i-would-have-invaded-iraq

Anyone have any thoughts on this? My immediate reaction is this is wrong, but maybe I'm naive

From the thread about that very thing

----


"Torture used to extract false information to justify Iraq War


Buried in footnote 857 of the report is this remarkable account of how the CIA rendered a detainee to an unknown country, had him tortured, and then used the false information he provided about Saddam’s WMDs and “alliance” with al Qaeda to justify the U.S. attack, including information used by Colin Powell at his notorious 2003 U.N. speech (via Sam Husseini):

feinstein.iraq_.png
"


https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/12/09/live-coverage-release-senate-torture-report/


I think not....

Only reason the "intel" even exists is because the administration wanted it really hard with sugar on top to exist. So no, even hawkish hilldoge wouldn't have gone with it, were she in charge. Wouldn't have ordered people to produce intel via torture, for one.
 
Yeah, no.
That intelligence was manufactured to please the white house.
They had a plan to topple Saddam, they wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11, there really no reason to believe that Hillary would've done the same.

Yeah, this is the main reason why I don't believe. But I don't know whether a H Clinton administration would have had the same goals as Bush II did. I don't think it would have, largely because an invasion of Iraq definitely didn't seem part of Bill Clinton's agenda.

Edit:

From the thread about that very thing



Only reason the "intel" even exists is because the administration wanted it really hard with sugar on top to exist. So no, even hawkish hilldoge wouldn't have gone with it, were she in charge. Wouldn't have ordered people to produce intel via torture, for one.

Wow, I'm an idiot, I didn't think of searching the forum instead of just this thread for some reason!
 
165 dollars a day? HOW?

http://watchdog.org/217942/christie-nj-expense-account/

Christie’s most notable spending spree occurred during the 2010 and 2011 NFL football seasons at MetLife Stadium, where the New York’s Giants and Jets play their home games. New Jersey’s governor traditionally enjoys free use of luxury boxes for games and other events at the government-owned venue, but food and beverages cost extra.

On 58 occasions, Christie used a debit card to pay a total of $82,594 to Delaware North Sportservice, which operates the concessions at MetLife.
The governor used it to buy $102,495 worth of groceries and alcoholic beverages from retail stores. It’s not clear from records whether the goods stocked the pantries and filled the refrigerators at Drumthwacket, the governor’s official mansion in Princeton, or the Mendham house where Christie and his family live. The store addresses were not disclosed.

Christie did most of his serious food shopping at Wegmans Food Markets, where he spent $76,373 during 53 shopping runs. He patronized ShopRite supermarkets 51 times for $11,971 in purchases – plus another $6,536 in seven visits to ShopRite’s liquor stores.
Other payments included $35,027 for tents and rental equipment, $10,786 for printing and office supplies and $4,338 for candy, cookies and confections.
 

Wilsongt

Member
Oh my God, I was hoping the young generation would be getting somewhat smarter, then I stumbled upon this politician:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Michelle-Malkin/269123710083?fref=nf

I found her after her ridiculous criticism of Michelle Obama's speech about the racist principal. Yet another solidified seat for the Fox News table.

Her site is pretty great

After 13 years in custody, Khadr will be breathing fresh air, walking the streets and maintaining his unrepentant pose of victimhood.

After 13 years, the real victims and the real children in this case — the daughter and son of the real hero, SFC Speer, Taryn and Tanner — will still be without a father.

Thanks, Obama.

I didn't even know people wrote that unironically nowadays.
 
Malkin made her bones by defending the internment of Japanese American citizens during WWII. Really tells you everything you need to know about her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom